Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/794,546

ACTIVE NOISE REDUCTION SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Aug 05, 2024
Examiner
KURR, JASON R
Art Unit
2695
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Honda Motor Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
524 granted / 697 resolved
+13.2% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+20.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
720
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.7%
-35.3% vs TC avg
§103
42.9%
+2.9% vs TC avg
§102
31.3%
-8.7% vs TC avg
§112
15.4%
-24.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 697 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bastyr (US 10741162 B1). With respect to claim 1, Bastyr discloses an active noise reduction system, comprising: a canceling sound output device (fig.1 #124; fig.5 #524) configured to output a canceling sound for canceling a noise (col.6 ln.35-38; col.10 ln.6-11; speaker #124,524 outputs anti-noise signal Y(n) for cancelling noise at a location of a user); an error microphone (fig.1 #112; fig.5 #512) configured to generate an error signal based on the noise and the canceling sound (col.6 ln.35-38; col.9 ln.52-55; microphone #112,512 captures an error signal based on road noise and the anti-noise signal from speaker #124,324); and a controller (fig.5 #500) configured to control the canceling sound output device based on the error signal (col.9 ln.39-58), wherein the controller includes: a control filter (fig.5 #518) configured to generate a control signal for controlling the canceling sound output device (col.9 ln.59-67, col.10 ln.1-5; ANC system #500 comprises a controllable filter #519 for generating anti-noise signal Y(n) for controlling speaker #524); and a secondary path filter (fig.5 #522) that represents an estimation value of a transfer function of a secondary path from the canceling sound output device to the error microphone (col.9 ln.25-28,59-63; secondary path filter #522 provides an estimation of a transfer function S(z) between the speaker #524 and microphone #512), the active noise reduction system further comprises a reference microphone (fig.1 #108; fig.5 #508) provided separately from the error microphone (col.5 ln.51-67; a microphone may be used as the vibration sensor #108,508 to generate the reference noise signal or “determination signal” X(n)), the reference microphone is configured to generate a determination signal (fig.5 “X(n)”) based on at least the noise (col.9 ln.59-67, col.10 ln.1-5; sensor #507 generates a determination signal or reference noise signal X(n)), and the controller is configured to determine whether the transfer function of the secondary path has changed based on the error signal and the determination signal (col.11 ln.14-39; signal analysis controller #562 may validate the accuracy of the secondary path filter #522 by comparing the error signal e(n) to a modified version of the determination signal X(n), referred to as the simulated error signal esim(n). This comparison of signals is “based on” the error signal e(n) and the determination signal X(n). This validation of accuracy of the secondary path reflects any changes to the secondary path itself). With respect to claim 2, Bastyr discloses the active noise reduction system according to claim 1, further comprising a second canceling sound output device provided separately from the canceling sound output device, wherein the controller includes a second control filter configured to generate a second control signal for controlling the second canceling sound output device, and the second control filter is configured to be adaptively updated based on the determination signal (col.7 ln.24-42; As shown in figure 2 of Bastyr, the active noise reduction system may be expanded to include at least a second canceling sound output device “L Speakers #224” wherein the controller comprises at least a second control filter “R*L W-filters #218” for generating control signals for each canceling sound output device #224, based on determination signals from sensors #208). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claim(s) 3 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bastyr (US 10741162 B1) in view of Shridhar et al (US 20100290635 A1). With respect to claim 3, Bastyr discloses the active noise reduction system according to claim 2, however does not disclose expressly wherein the controller includes a second secondary path filter that represents an estimation value of a transfer function of a second secondary path from the second canceling sound output device to the reference microphone, and the controller is configured to determine whether the transfer function of the second secondary path has changed based on the error signal and the determination signal. Shridhar discloses an active noise reduction system comprising: first and second cancelling sound output devices (fig.3 #200) configured to output sound for cancelling noise; first and second error microphones (fig.3 #202) configured to generate an error signal based on the noise and the canceling sound, and first and second secondary path filters (fig.3 #322) that represents an estimation of a transfer function of a secondary path (fig.3 #315) from each cancelling sound output device to each error microphone (Par.[0037][0044]). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the present invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use a secondary path filter for each control filter path of Bastyr, as performed by Shridhar. The motivation for doing so would have been to estimate a secondary path transfer function between each sound output device and each error microphone within the active noise reduction system, thereby individually adapting each noise cancelling signal according to the acoustics of each secondary path. With respect to claim 7, Bastyr discloses the active noise reduction system according to claim 1, further comprising a second canceling sound output device provided separately from the canceling sound output device (col.7 ln.24-42; As shown in figure 2 of Bastyr, the active noise reduction system may be expanded to include at least a second canceling sound output device “L Speakers #224” wherein the controller comprises at least a second control filter “R*L W-filters #218” for generating control signals for each canceling sound output device #224, based on determination signals from sensors #208), however does not disclose expressly wherein the controller includes a second secondary path filter that represents an estimation value of a transfer function of a second secondary path from the second canceling sound output device to the reference microphone. Shridhar discloses an active noise reduction system comprising: first and second cancelling sound output devices (fig.3 #200) configured to output sound for cancelling noise; first and second error microphones (fig.3 #202) configured to generate an error signal based on the noise and the canceling sound, and first and second secondary path filters (fig.3 #322) that represents an estimation of a transfer function of a secondary path (fig.3 #315) from each cancelling sound output device to each error microphone (Par.[0037][0044]). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the present invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use a secondary path filter for each control filter path of Bastyr, as performed by Shridhar. The motivation for doing so would have been to estimate a secondary path transfer function between each sound output device and each error microphone within the active noise reduction system, thereby individually adapting each noise cancelling signal according to the acoustics of each secondary path. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4-6 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Christoph et al (US 20100195844 A1) discloses an adaptive noise control system. Wurm (US 20100014685 A1) discloses an adaptive noise control system. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON R KURR whose telephone number is (571)270-5981. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9-5. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Vivian Chin can be reached at (571-272-7848. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. JASON R. KURR Primary Examiner Art Unit 2695 /JASON R KURR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2695
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 05, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603077
ACTIVE SOUND GENERATION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598439
POWER FAULT RECOVERY MECHANISM FOR AN AUDIO SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598424
Zoned Audio Duck For In Car Conversation
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598414
System And Method For Generating An Audio Signal
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597411
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR VIRTUAL MICROPHONES IN ACTIVE NOISE CANCELLATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+20.6%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 697 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month